Stakeholder Accountability: Workplace Injuries in the UK and Canada

Abstract

An increasing feature of public services is the plurality of provision, but few studies examine how organizational arrangements affect stakeholder accountability for financial and performance issues. We examine stakeholder accountability for public services under different organizational forms by examining the workplace injuries systems in the UK and Canada (services provided through private insurance, direct government provision and stand-alone agency). The UK system is a largely uncoordinated arrangement of government provision through the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) and compulsory private insurance. In Canada, the stand-alone Workers Compensation Boards (WCBs) administer a compensation system on a no fault basis and levy a fee from employers. The research study consisted of stakeholder interviews and documentary analysis in Canada and the UK. The primary stakeholders of the DWP industrial injuries benefit system; the commercial companies providing employers' liability schemes and the Canadian WCBs differ markedly. While all three arrangements have primary stakeholders that include (injured) workers and the government either in a regulatory or funding role, the importance of other stakeholders such as employers varies considerably. We found that stand-alone agencies can facilitate stakeholder accountability but 'voluntary' accountability can lead to lax targets. Government provision tends to rely on political accountability but with little consultation with interested parties. Commercial accountability neglects both the wider aspects of public accountability and the non-investor stakeholders. Stakeholder accountability needs to be planned and controlled under the different organizational forms. Where there is a range of provider, accountability for program elements should be established.